- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
More bad news about the new Terminator
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:44 pm
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:44 pm
So it sounds like a complete retcon. this is the new sarah connors story:
this just makes absolutely no sense now. but i bet it still makes a lot of money and gets the trilogy its trying to set up.
LINK
quote:
Sarah Connor isn’t the innocent she was when Linda Hamilton first sported feathered hair and acid-washed jeans in the role. Nor is she Hamilton’s steely zero body-fat warrior in 1991’s T2. Rather, the mother of humanity’s messiah was orphaned by a Terminator at age 9. Since then, she’s been raised by (brace yourself) Schwarzenegger’s Terminator—an older T-800 she calls “Pops”—who is programmed to guard rather than to kill. As a result, Sarah is a highly trained antisocial recluse who’s great with a sniper rifle but not so skilled at the nuances of human emotion.
this just makes absolutely no sense now. but i bet it still makes a lot of money and gets the trilogy its trying to set up.
LINK
This post was edited on 10/29/14 at 1:45 pm
18
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:45 pm to BlacknGold
damn 
that is so awful
that is so awful 
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:45 pm to BlacknGold
Maybe the worst news is that it's being made at all.
This post was edited on 10/29/14 at 1:46 pm
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:46 pm to BlacknGold
quote:I wouldn't be so sure about that. If it's bad, it will get the same reception the last one did.
but i bet it still makes a lot of money and gets the trilogy its trying to set up.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:47 pm to abellsujr
i think the combined star power of Daenaryrus and Doctor Who will carry it enough
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:49 pm to BlacknGold
I'm waiting on the reviews before I decide whether or not I buy a ticket.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:52 pm to BlacknGold
This could be worse than "Terminator: Salvation" even with the presence of a Time Lord, Khaleesi and Ah-Nold.
And I'm sick of this BS about not disclosing the role an actor is playing. The last Star Trek did that with Cumberbatch. I mean, will it destroy the movie if we know that Matt Smith is John Connor or Kyle Reese's brother?
And I'm sick of this BS about not disclosing the role an actor is playing. The last Star Trek did that with Cumberbatch. I mean, will it destroy the movie if we know that Matt Smith is John Connor or Kyle Reese's brother?
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:53 pm to BlacknGold
I don't know if this is worse than the Ghostbusters reboot or not...
And that's scary.
And that's scary.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:54 pm to timbo
quote:
if we know that Matt Smith is John Connor or Kyle Reese's brother
hes not john connor. the article says Jason Clarke is. maybe he's kyle reese's brother but i hadnt heard anything about that.
eta: he probably is? i mean they have the entire reese family cast on the imdb page.
This post was edited on 10/29/14 at 1:55 pm
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:54 pm to BlacknGold
quote:
Since then, she’s been raised by (brace yourself) Schwarzenegger’s Terminator—an older T-800 she calls “Pops”—who is programmed to guard rather than to kill. As a result, Sarah is a highly trained antisocial recluse who’s great with a sniper rifle but not so skilled at the nuances of human emotion.
As outlandish as it sounds. If you have unlimited time travel, protecting Sarah Conner does make sense. Of course, if she knows everything, then how will she date Reese and have John? Also, say a Terminator just goes back to 1845 and just blows up the ship carrying the Connor's to America..what then?
I/We knew something would have to be strange to have Swrachenegger involved. I was hoping maybe he would have possible been someone working on the project, but then that has been done.
LINK
Posted on 10/29/14 at 2:36 pm to BlacknGold
Hated the last one so much, I don't care if the new one has 100% RT and Freaux proclaims it to be the peak of all film to date. I will not see it and I won't even stream the thing for free.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 3:05 pm to TigerMyth36
quote:
Hated the last one so much, I don't care if the new one has 100% RT and Freaux proclaims it to be the peak of all film to date. I will not see it and I won't even stream the thing for free.
Yeah I don't think I'd go see this in the theater. Streaming is a maybe.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 3:09 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
I don't know if this is worse than the Ghostbusters reboot or not...
its worse by far
At least the new GB is a full blown reboot and seems to be trying (or at least has the chance) to do its own thing.
This is some strange half reboot half continuation horseshite. Why the frick is it part of the Terminator continuity if they are going to retcon it like that?
This post was edited on 10/29/14 at 3:12 pm
Posted on 10/29/14 at 3:11 pm to BlacknGold
ugh god dammit
Posted on 10/29/14 at 3:12 pm to abellsujr
quote:
I wouldn't be so sure about that. If it's bad, it will get the same reception the last one did.
You mean the last one that made millions and millions of dollars overseas and therefore wasn't a failure at all?
Posted on 10/29/14 at 3:14 pm to BlacknGold
Sometimes I hate Hollywood.
Come up with some fckng original ideas for once
Come up with some fckng original ideas for once
Posted on 10/29/14 at 3:18 pm to Teddy Ruxpin
quote:
You mean the last one that made millions and millions of dollars overseas and therefore wasn't a failure at all?
T4 had a $200 million budget not including marketing and only made $370 million total. It made enough on DVD/Bluray to get up to about $401 million total.
Studio films typically have to double their budget before they start making their money back b/c about half the money goes to the theater vendors.
At best it brought a mild profit and more than likely barely broke even. The reason its getting another film is its still a major franchise name and not b/c the last one justified it financially. If it had done so well, they'd be continuing with that cast and storyline. It didn't so they aren't.
This post was edited on 10/29/14 at 3:19 pm
Posted on 10/29/14 at 3:33 pm to BlacknGold
Every time a terminator or resistance enters another timeline anything is possible I guess. I liked how the Sarah Connor Chronicles widened the scope of the war with multiple terminators and resistance fighting in present and future. It sounds like maybe this is the direction the future films are going. I'm cautiously optimistic.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 3:35 pm to BlacknGold
quote:
new Terminator
No such thing. I'll recognize an old Indy fighting Russians before that.
They can call it whatever they want, I don't have to play.
I don't recognize a gal Starbuck (Stardoe?), a dysfunctional, whiny, Emo NCC 1701 crew and I don't recognize this.
:dropsmic:
Posted on 10/29/14 at 5:15 pm to Teddy Ruxpin
quote:It was a total failure considering they wanted to make a trilogy and didn't because it sucked balls.
You mean the last one that made millions and millions of dollars overseas and therefore wasn't a failure at all?
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News